We would like to address a topic we hope will be a benefit to anyone who has taken it upon themselves to study and understand the Scripture. Often when we read the Scripture, we become our own worst enemy — and being cognizant and weary of that fact is important. Here we would like to show ways in which we can unknowingly distort the Scripture toward our own heart, our own desires, and ultimately our own destruction, as Peter has warned us.
PREFACE
So let’s consider his words in 2 Peter 3:16-18,
16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which there are some things that are hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. 17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unscrupulous people and lose your own firm commitment…
With the best of intentions, Peter plainly warns us that we have a proclivity to distort the Scripture to our own destruction — which is a grave thing to hear from an apostle of the Lord Jesus — and such heavy words should be given due diligence. It would be foolish and self-righteous for us to assume that this warning applies only to other people — never ourselves.
When he says that even the Scripture can be something used to destroy us, we would do well to investigate what that entails.
In verse 17 Peter goes as far as to say that we should also be on our guard against people who distort the Scripture in this way — calling them unscrupulous — a word translated from the Greek “athesmos” (Strong’s G113), which Thayer’s Greek Lexicon defines as,
of one who breaks through the restraints of law and gratifies his lusts
Peter uses the same word in 2 Peter 2:7-8,
7 and if He rescued righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the perverted conduct of unscrupulous people 8 (for by what he saw and heard that righteous man, while living among them, felt his righteous soul tormented day after day by their lawless deeds)
With this word choice, Peter is comparing one who distorts the Scripture in such a manner to be like those in Sodom and Gomorrah. Also if we listen to someone who does this, we run the risk of losing our own “firm commitment” — but firm commitment to what? Hopefully in the course of this discussion, we will show what he means.
We will cover a telling sign that we can recognize within ourselves where — and how — we might be distorting the Scripture. Rest assured, if we do not do these things — and allow the Scripture to say what it is saying — it is hard not to see the message of righteousness and growing in a true knowledge of the Lord on every page.
BEGGING THE QUESTION
An all too common logical fallacy many people interpreting Scripture use — often unwittingly — is called “begging the question.” This concept was first coined by Aristotle, but when he explained it in the Greek, it was more along the lines of “asking for the initial thing.” Somehow through being translated from Greek to Latin and then English, it ended up being “begging the question.”
Many people falsely believe that “begging the question” means the same as “raising the question” or “demanding an inevitable question” — for example, “The length of War And Peace raises the question of whether or not anyone has the patience to read it.”
In a valid argument, when we state a conclusion, we must give a premise which supports that conclusion. However, when we “beg the question,” our premise simply assumes that our conclusion was true in the first place.
For example, “Red is the best hair color, because it is the reddest of all hair colors.” In saying that, I have presumed that red is the best hair color. The premise of the conclusion — red hair is the reddest hair color — was actually the same as the conclusion itself — red hair is the best hair color. I still haven’t explained why red is the best hair color.
Another example could be, “Summer is the best season, because it is the warmest of all seasons.” In saying that, I have presumed that warm weather is the best weather — the premise that warm weather is the best weather assumed that warm weather is the best weather. It did not show why warm weather is the best weather.
A strong tell in the above two examples is that the premise and the conclusion were actually the same — however, the fact that they are the same is sometimes not very obvious — especially when we are interpreting Scripture..
So let’s use another example, except this time using the Scripture: “God is love and it would not be loving toward the cow to kill and eat it, so you shouldn’t do it.” The premise of the conclusion is that God’s love is something which extends to cows in a manner which precludes us from eating them. This does not show us why God’s love is that way, or how we can define it that way — rather, it merely assumes that it is that way. The premise of God’s love assumed that cows shouldn’t be eaten — without first bothering to prove it.
Begging the question is very closely related to — or even synonymous with — “circular reasoning.” In circular reasoning, the premise and the conclusion are essentially the same idea — just like the example with the cow above. Given that they are the same thing, the premise does not and cannot actually prove the conclusion.
Using the example of red hair, circular reasoning would state that red hair is the best hair color because it is the reddest hair color. Therefore, the reddest hair color is the best hair color because red hair is the best hair color.
There is a very crucial reason why people make such arguments — and believe such arguments — which beg the question or have circular reasoning — and that is simply because they want to. In other words, such arguments are very persuasive to people who wanted to believe the conclusion in the first place — or even already believed the conclusion.
You will find this rhetorical strategy often when “preaching to the choir” — where your audience already agrees with your premise and conclusion — so they will be predisposed to any evidence confirms both premise and conclusion — without even realizing they are one and the same.
EXAMPLES OF BEGGING THE QUESTION IN SCRIPTURAL EXEGESIS
Here we’ll present some more common examples we have all seen to better demonstrate this concept of “begging the question” more clearly.
Revelation 4:1-2 says,
1 After these things I looked, and behold, a door standing open in heaven, and the first voice which I had heard, like the sound of a trumpet speaking with me, said, “Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after these things.” 2 Immediately I was in the Spirit; and behold, a throne was standing in heaven, and someone was sitting on the throne.
We have often heard Christians claim this passage is proof of a “pretribulation rapture” — in fact, it has become a foundation stone of that doctrine. The pre-trib doctrine states that the door being opened in heaven and John’s subsequent taking up to heaven is proof that there will be a “pretribulation rapture.”
When they use this passage as a premise for that conclusion, they are making the following assumptions:
- When the elect are gathered (Matthew 24:31), they will be taken up to heaven.
- When the elect are gathered, it will be before the “great tribulation” (Revelation 7:14).
- John being taking up to heaven in his vision is a reference to the elect being gathered.
However, Revelation 4:1-2 does not support or prove any of these assumptions — rather, those who presume pre-trib rapture to be true merely assume that’s what these verses mean. The passage itself clearly does not actually say any of these things — therefore, to use it to support the idea of a “pretribulation rapture” is begging the question.
Another example of this circular reasoning often arises out of Philippians 4:12-14:
12 I know how to get along with little, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret of being filled and going hungry, both of having abundance and suffering need. 13 I can do all things through Him who strengthens me. 14 Nevertheless, you have done well to share with me in my difficulty.
Christians often use verse 13 to justify their belief that the Lord will strengthen them to succeed in their earthly endeavors, such as winning a sports game, closing a business deal, or, say, passing a test.
They merely assume that verse 13 is an unqualified statement which they can apply to anything which they — their own subjective view — feels the Lord should be helping them with.
However, the qualifying nature of Paul’s statement — the Lord strengthening Paul through hunger and to stay right-minded in prosperity — is evident in what he has said. When we choose to ignore these explicit qualifiers in these verses, we end up merely “begging the question.”
Another popular passage to beg the question is with Romans 9:16-18:
16 So then, it does not depend on the person who wants it nor the one who runs, but on God who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very reason I raised you up, in order to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the earth.” 18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.
We have heard it often argued that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart because of a “judicial hardening” — the idea that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart because Pharaoh deserved it, not because God “raised [Pharaoh] up in order to demonstrate [His] power in [Pharoah].”
The assumption is that God did not take mercy on Pharaoh — judicially — because he deserved it — despite the fact that mercy is fundamentally a choice not to take judicial action against someone who deserves it.
To word the assumption another way, the passage says that God raised Pharaoh up for a specific purpose — to demonstrate His power. The assumption states that in spite of that, it was by Pharaoh’s own actions that God decided not to have mercy on Pharaoh — rather than Pharaoh being raised up for that very purpose in the first place.
To word it even another way, Pharaoh’s evil actions preceded God’s intent to raise Pharaoh up as a medium with which to demonstrate God’s own power — as opposed to Pharaoh’s heart being hardened as a result of God raising Pharaoh up to demonstrate God’s power.
The assumption doesn’t support the idea that Pharaoh was hardened due to a judicial hardening — rather, it merely presumes it. The reason it presumes it rather than supports it is because Paul didn’t actually say that Pharaoh was hardened because he deserved it.
As a final and oft-quoted example is Genesis 4:6-7:
6 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? And why is your face gloomy? 7 If you do well, will your face not be cheerful? And if you do not do well, sin is lurking at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it.”
Some have argued that because Cain was a literal child of Satan — and not of Adam — that he was therefore incapable of mastering his sin — that is, he was destined to do evil because of his satanic paternal lineage. They argue that the Lord actually had no intention for Cain to master his sin, but challenged Cain to do so anyway in order to prove that he couldn’t master it.
This convoluted argument is based on the premise that Cain was unable to master his sin — and therefore claiming that the Lord intended to prove that Cain was unable to master his sin merely presumes that Cain was unable to master his sin — without bothering to prove that Cain was unable to master his sin. Neither of these two points — that the Lord intended to prove something about Cain — and that Cain was unable to master his sin due to his lineage — are actually stated in the passage. Therefore, it is begging the question.
It is very important to note that certain Scriptures need to be understood based on assumptions; however, if we feel the need to propose an interpretation which is based on assumptions, those assumptions first need to be proven. Not only that, but at some point the assumptions need to be self-evident in the passage. The Scripture actually needs to state the assumption.
As a very basic example, consider Philippians 4:12-14 again. In refuting the interpretation which begs the question, we made an assumption: Philippians 4:13 is a qualified statement that cannot be applied universally to any endeavor someone may undertake. We needed to make that assumption, because if Paul meant Philippians 4:13 to be taken in isolation — cherry picked, as it were — then we would have to concede to the interpretation that we refuted.
However, when considering verses 12 and 14, it is self-evident that verse 13 was indeed a qualified statement. We were able to accept the words of verses 12 and 14 without making any further assumptions. At some point, an interpretation needs to rest on passages from the Scripture which require no further assumptions to be made. At some point, we need to accept the plain words of Scripture for what they are saying.
CASE STUDY
How does this all apply to distorting the Scripture to our own destruction though? Let’s use another example — this time one that is harder — and relevant to 2 Peter 3:16-17. Consider Matthew 5:20,
For I say to you that unless your righteousness far surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Many of us have heard the following circular logic applied to this verse: It is impossible to far surpass the righteousness of the scribes and the Pharisees — therefore, the Lord didn’t truly mean that we should strive to attain that righteousness.
Did you notice the begging the question in that logic? The conclusion was that we shouldn’t try to attain to a righteousness which far surpasses the scribes and the Pharisees. The premise was that it is impossible to attain that righteousness. The premise was made only because the conclusion was already assumed to be true — it doesn’t actually support or prove the conclusion.
Consider another example — Luke 13:23-24,
23 And someone said to Him, “Lord, are there just a few who are being saved?” And He said to them, 24 “Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able.”
They apply the same circular logic: they claim the Lord is saying that it is impossible to actually be righteous — and He is using the example of the narrow door to demonstrate that — asserting that the door is so narrow that no one will be righteous enough to enter it.
Here, their premise is that true righteousness is impossible to attain. The conclusion is that we therefore should not be overly concerned with attaining it. Another conclusion is that we shouldn’t accept the plain words of what the Lord is saying here. Again, their premise was made only because they assumed that their conclusions were true.
The circular reasoning in relation to Matthew 5:20 and Luke 13:23-24 creates a doctrine which removes the incentive to actually make the effort to attain righteousness — or to be able to enter through the narrow gate and be far more righteous than the scribes and the Pharisees.
Consider the premise, “it is impossible to actually attain righteousness in our own deeds.” If we were to accept this premise, we would need to prove it using the Scriptures. At some point, there needs to be a Scripture which is self-evident in which no further assumptions need to be made. To this end, those who uphold this premise might quote Romans 3:21-24,
21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 but it is the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus
This passage states that through faith in Jesus Christ, we may attain to the righteousness of God. That justification is a gift of grace through the redemption promised to us in the Lord’s death and resurrection. Some will argue that given that it is impossible to attain righteousness — because “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” — that supposedly through faith we are given righteousness automatically merely by believing in the Lord Jesus.
Out of this presumption arises the common belief that simply believing in the Lord Jesus makes us righteous regardless of whether we are actually living righteous lives or not.
Does this prove that it is impossible to actually attain righteousness by our own deeds? It doesn’t — because the Scripture doesn’t actually say that — rather it has again simply assumed its own premise. The words of the Scripture — “all have sinned” — is markedly different from the premise that it is impossible to attain to righteousness in our deeds and actions.
Notice the rhetorical sleight of hand here — the same premise was used in all three passages despite the premise not being self-evident in any of them. Those who uphold this view would probably have more verses to quote based on the same premise, but suffice to say that the premise is never self-evident in the entirety of the Scripture.
The premise quickly starts to get very tired, as we have plain, straight forward words like those in 1 John 3:7,
Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous;
John has clearly stated that if we believe that the Scripture tells us that we can be righteous without practicing righteousness, then we have been deceived. We are willing to accept that John’s meaning is self-evident — we accept it at face value.
Yet those who believe that the righteousness — which according to Romans 3:22 is based on faith — is nevertheless something attributed to us regardless of the state of our lives must necessarily make further assumptions about 1 John 3:7 in order to show why he doesn’t mean exactly what he says — a common conundrum for those who have a habit of begging the question.
James 2:18-20 says,
18 But someone may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” 19 You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. 20 But are you willing to acknowledge, you foolish person, that faith without works is useless?
James is saying that he is able to display that his own faith is something tangible by his own works — that if we think faith shouldn’t result in works in a similar manner, then we are foolish. Again, we are willing to accept James’ plain words at face value. Proverbs 1:7 says of the foolish,
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; Fools despise wisdom and instruction.
This proverb states that the foolish just don’t like wisdom and instruction. If we connect that idea with the words of James, we could fairly conclude that he is saying that people who think that faith doesn’t have to have works actually merely despise wisdom and instruction. This observation is given to distinguish them from those who fear the Lord — wherein lies the beginning of knowledge.
Those who are foolish do not fear the Lord, so they despise His wisdom and instruction. Psalm 111:10 says,
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; All those who follow His commandments have a good understanding…
Here we see that those who fear the Lord will necessarily follow His commands and have a good understanding. Consider this verse again in contradistinction to the “fool” in Proverbs 1:7 — someone who does not like wisdom and instruction — and does not fear the Lord — and who will not follow the Lord’s commands and have a good understanding.
A BETTER WAY
In light of these verses, let’s propose another way of interpreting Matthew 5:20 and Luke 13:24. What happens when we simply allow the verses to be true without making extra assumptions? What if we actively try not to beg the question? Every premise we use must be a premise which already exists within the Scripture that is self-evident — rather than being a premise which presumes its own truth based on some agenda or bias that we have.
When the Lord says, “Unless your righteousness far surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:20), we simply accept it. When He says, “many… will seek to enter [being saved] and will not be able” (Luke 13:24), we do not despise this instruction — and simply take it at face value. When He states that “the gate is narrow and the way is constricted that leads to life, and there are few who find it” (Matthew 7:14), we allow it in our hearts to mean exactly what He says.
These are frightening things to say — and one could even say that they may elicit some trepidation within us. However, Proverbs tells us that fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom and knowledge! The right kind of fear is good — it is productive. If we can accept His words and fear, then we have arrived at the beginning of wisdom and knowledge. We have arrived at the beginning of good understanding and not despising wisdom and instruction.
See how easy it was to understand? We didn’t have to devise ways to make it say something other than what it was saying. When John says, “the one who practices righteousness is righteous” (1 John 3:7), we can easily agree. When James says, “faith without works is useless” (James 2:20), we can see the wisdom in James’ words.
The beauty of it is that all of these sayings line up perfectly with one another — and with Matthew 5:20, Luke 13:24 and Matthew 7:14. We didn’t even need to bring in an extra premise which needed to be proven by some other verse. When we have no shame when looking at these words — accepting them for what they say, we become like the words of Psalm 119:1-8,
1 Blessed are those whose way is blameless, Who walk in the Law of the Lord. 2 Blessed are those who comply with His testimonies, And seek Him with all their heart. 3 They also do no injustice; They walk in His ways. 4 You have ordained Your precepts, That we are to keep them diligently. 5 Oh that my ways may be established To keep Your statutes! 6 Then I will not be ashamed When I look at all Your commandments. 7 I will give thanks to You with uprightness of heart, When I learn Your righteous judgments. 8 I will keep Your statutes; Do not utterly abandon me!
The Psalm here tells us that IF our way is blameless, if we walk in the Law of the Lord, if we comply with His testimonies, if we seek Him with all our heart, if we do no injustice, if we walk in His ways, keep them diligently, and are established in His statues, THEN we will not be ashamed when we look at His commandments.
On the other hand, if we don’t do those things — or if we do not even aspire to do those things because we presume they are impossible, then we will be ashamed when we look at His commandments.
IF we do not believe we need to be righteous, then any verse which states that righteousness is mandatory will be like smoke in our eyes — and we will have no choice but to ignore it or explain it away. Alternatively, we would rather not be ashamed when looking at His commandments, so we invent circular logic which isn’t in the Scripture to make ourselves feel better.
We would argue that this is how we distort Scripture to our own destruction, as Peter warns against, because we simply disagree with what the Scripture says.
This is a very important lesson to learn: When we simply disagree with what is being said — or are ashamed at what it says — we tend to beg the question and invent circular logic to get around it. If we find ourselves struggling to accept certain words in the Scripture, and we find ourselves looking for ways to get around it — then that is a good sign that we need to stop and reflect on our motivations to do so.
A CASE FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS
This is especially true when the words or commands of the Scripture are quite plain and easy to comprehend, but as Peter said, “there are some things that are hard to understand” (2 Peter 3:16). However, how could we hope to understand that which is “hard to understand” if we cannot even accept the plain words of the Scripture? Hebrews 5:12-14 says,
12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the actual words of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is unacquainted with the word of righteousness, for he is an infant. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to distinguish between good and evil.
Those who need the milk are those who need to become acquainted with the word of righteousness. In contradistinction, those who eat solid food are those who are mature — whose senses are trained to distinguish good and evil by practice. We need to be able to accept the plain words of Scripture — to fear them and to train our sense with practice, that we may “not be ashamed when [we] look at all [His] commandments” (Psalm 119:6).
Hebrews 6:4-6 tells us,
4 For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.
Hebrews 10:26-31 likewise warns,
26 For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a terrifying expectation of judgment and the fury of a fire which will consume the adversaries. 28 Anyone who has ignored the Law of Moses is put to death without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 How much more severe punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know Him who said, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge His people.” 31 It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
Remember how we quoted Romans 3:21-24, where it says that all have sinned and being justified is a gift of grace? We have no shame at those words either — we are fine with it being true at face value. The Lord’s sacrifice was something that we didn’t deserve and there was no work which we could have done to deserve it — let alone the work of circumcision as Paul states in Romans 4. It is pure grace and mercy. Romans 3:25 says,
whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in God’s merciful restraint He let the sins previously committed go unpunished
Here we are told that the sins we have committed in the past are forgiven — by pure grace and mercy — without anything you could have done — the record has been wiped clean. We can start fresh, purely by believing in the Lord Jesus by faith. There is no work of the law and literally nothing that could have done it except Jesus Christ alone — and our subsequent faith in His work.
However, the verses we have shown from Hebrews, 1 John and James — when accepted in their simplicity — reveal that going forward, “those who belong to Christ Jesus crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.” (Galatians 5:24) If we have crucified our flesh, then we are dead, so that “we would no longer be slaves to sin; for the one who has died is freed from sin.” (Romans 6:6-7)
This may seem fearful and daunting, but that is good — fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge! Remember how Psalm 119 said, “I will keep Your statutes; Do not utterly abandon me!” (verse 8) Undoubtedly, these are words of fear. It is saying, “I will do it — just please don’t abandon me!” Whereas Hebrews 10:26 shows the condemnation against willful sin, this verse shows the heart of someone who does not will to sin.
However, it also says, “I will give thanks to You with uprightness of heart, when I learn Your righteous judgments.” (verse 7) It expresses thanks, because the desire to learn those ways — and fear of not learning them — has produced a sincere faith and certainty in the Lord that it will be done. We will come to that place where we have no shame, just as Paul said in Galatians 5:5,
For we, through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness.
Through faith in the Lord Jesus, He will make us righteous! It is our hope that He will do so, because we have faith in Him to do so. It is not our strength but His, just as Peter said in 2 Peter 1:3,
for His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence.
Paul says exactly the same thing in Romans 3:26, which continues on from what we have already quoted,
for the demonstration, that is, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
If only we have true faith in Him — according to a true knowledge of Him — He will justify us. 1 John 1:9 says the same thing again,
If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous, so that He will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
If only we will not justify ourselves — being meek before Him in humility — acknowledging our sin to Him — He will cleanse all of our unrighteousness from us. If we stop justifying ourselves, then He will justify us. He will do the work in us and for us, if only we will have faith in Him to do so. The Lord Himself says in Matthew 7:7-8,
7 “Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened.
If only we will come to Him and ask and seek Him with all our hearts, then we will find Him. Deuteronomy 4:29 says,
But from there you will seek the Lord your God, and you will find Him if you search for Him with all your heart and all your soul.
Jeremiah 29:13 says,
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart.
If we ask for His righteousness, then we will for certain receive it. By His divine power, He will perform that work in us. Two beautiful pieces of writing from John display this perfectly. The first is John 3:16-21,
16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him. 18 The one who believes in Him is not judged; the one who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
We all know these verses so far — they are a favorite among many who still need the milk of the word, that they may be acquainted with the word of righteousness. The word of righteousness is as follows:
19 And this is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the Light; for their deeds were evil.
Those who love darkness do not come into the light because their own deeds are evil. If we engage in logic which begs the question so that we may disregard the words of the Lord Jesus and His apostles, it means that His commands were too burdensome for us — we refuse to let go and come into the light.
If we disregard Christ Jesus’ words — or the words of His apostles — then we are already judged, because the apostles are our judges (Matthew 19:28) — and Christ Jesus is our Judge (Acts 10:42). If only we will listen to them and come into the light, we will not be judged, because we already subjected ourselves to their judgement in their words in the Scripture.
20 For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light, so that his deeds will not be exposed. 21 But the one who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds will be revealed as having been performed in God.”
If we are too eager to cling to our evil deeds and gloss over the Lord’s words with circular logic, then we are admitting that we hate the Light. If only we will come to the Light and allow It to shine on us in all of Its glory, then it will be revealed that our deeds were performed in God — it is God who was doing it in us and not the strength within our own flesh — which is dead in the crucifixion of Christ.
The second piece of writing is Revelation 3:15-20,
15 ‘I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot. 16 So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will vomit you out of My mouth.
The Lord is saying if we were cold, we would not have been considered in the first place — but anything less than hot is not good enough either.
17 Because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have no need of anything,” and you do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked
He is directly addressing people who in their own minds have got all the answers and everything figured out in their faith. Likely they have disregarded His simple commands and rejected His power to bring about righteousness in us. The lessons of Luke 17:7-10 and Luke 18:9-14 teach that there is no point at which we should believe that we are “rich, and have become wealthy, and have no need of anything.”
18 I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire so that you may become rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness will not be revealed; and eye salve to apply to your eyes so that you may see. 19 Those whom I love, I rebuke and discipline; therefore be zealous and repent. 20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me.
Here the Lord makes it clear that we need only to come to Him — to step into His light and invite Him in the door. If we do so, He will refine us and make us righteous.
By simply accepting what Scripture has said — and without begging the question — we have come to a “sincere and pure devotion to Christ.” (2 Corinthians 11:3) We are not ashamed of any of His words.
PETER’S EXEGESIS
Let us now consider Peter’s words which led up to the section on distorting Scripture to our own destruction — covering 2 Peter 3:10-18,
10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be discovered.
Peter 3 until verse 10 is Peter’s admonishment that the day of the Lord is indeed coming — and that it is foolish to think that it isn’t. This is summarized in verse 10 itself, where he is saying that the day will come like a thief — our attitude should be that it could arrive at any moment.
He says that in the day of the Lord with its intense heat, the earth and its works will be discovered. Earlier in verse 7 he says that “the present… earth [is] being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly people.”
11 Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness
Peter says given that the Lord could arrive at any moment — and the ill fate of the ungodly — what sort of people ought we to be? This is a rhetorical connection on his part — because he is certainly about to tell us what sort of people we must be. He has even tacitly told us already by telling as what fate awaits the ungodly.
12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat! 13 But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells.
He says that we should be a people who look for and would even hasten this day. We should be actively looking forward to it because in the heaven and earth which follow, only righteousness will dwell there. Implicit in this statement is a confidence that we will not be among the ungodly who are destroyed. This event with its destruction and subsequent righteousness should be the focus of our attention.
14 Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found spotless and blameless by Him, at peace, 15 and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you
Peter confirms this when he goes on to say in verse 14 that considering we are looking for these things — accepting it as a given — we should be diligent to be found spotless and blameless before the Lord. He then says in verse 15 that if there is a delay in the coming of the Lord, that we should regard it as His patience for our benefit.
He also attests that Paul is wise and that Paul has been instructing the same things as what Peter has been instructing in his own letters — to be found spotless and blameless before the Lord.
16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which there are some things that are hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.
He then says that some twist Paul’s writing and the rest of Scripture to their own destruction. In light of everything which Peter has outlined, what would cause one’s own destruction?
Naturally, it would be to twist Scripture into a doctrine which does not necessarily bring about a desire for the coming of the Lord. If we twist those writings into something which excuses us from being spotless and blameless before the Lord, then we are distorting it to our own destruction.
An example of this would be believing that literally every single Israelite will be saved and enter the kingdom regardless of whether they endeavored to be “spotless and blameless” before the Lord. Peter describes this type of doctrine here:
17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unscrupulous people and lose your own firm commitment
Peter states that we are to be on guard against those who would cause us to lose our own commitment by convincing us to distort the Scripture to our own destruction:
18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.
Instead of being caught up in these things, Peter says that we should be growing in the “grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” But how do we know we are growing?
2 Peter 1:5-7 gives us some qualities which we should be “applying [with] all diligence”: moral excellence, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, brotherly kindness and love. In verses 8-11 he says,
8 For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they do not make you useless nor unproductive in the true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 For the one who lacks these qualities is blind or short-sighted, having forgotten his purification from his former sins. 10 Therefore, brothers and sisters, be all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choice of you; for as long as you practice these things, you will never stumble; 11 for in this way the entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be abundantly supplied to you.
Here he has stated the same thing as in chapter 3 — we must be growing and strive to be found spotless before our Lord so that the way into the Kingdom will be given to us — because if we do not, we will be found in the judgement of the wicked. It is not as though we are left to do this in our own strength, but He says in 2 Peter 1:3,
for His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence.
To “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” is to understand that by His divine power and help we have everything pertaining to life and godliness — if only we acknowledge our sin and ask Him.
This simple understanding is a critically important thing to understand in Scriptural exegesis — the interpretation of Scripture. If we are understanding Scripture in a way which brings us closer to spotlessness in a true knowledge of the Lord Jesus, then we are on the right path.
However, if we are understanding Scripture in a way which distorts it to our own destruction — if our understanding doesn’t encourage us to grow and to act as if the day of the Lord could be at any second — it is not a correct understanding.
We have come to a view which requires us to be “diligent to be found spotless and blameless by Him” (2 Peter 3:14), which is Peter’s standard of Biblical exegesis. If we do otherwise, then we are distorting the Scripture to our own destruction (2 Peter 3:16).
For good measure, a full reading of 2 Peter is encouraged when completing this article. When not engaging in begging the question and circular logic, it is hard to see Peter’s teaching as anything other than a call to righteousness — and submission to the authority of the Lord Jesus and the teachings of His apostles.
CONCLUSION
We often wonder why many Christian circles find it so hard to accept the plain words of the Scripture. Why are there so many premises and assumptions which assume their own “truth”? Why would we want to assume our own “truth” when we have the truth of the Scriptures right in front of us?
To go even further, why would we pay lip-service to the truth of the Scripture when it so clearly contradicts our own “truth”?
The only conclusion we can come to is that begging the question necessarily implies a disagreement with the Scripture itself. When we beg the question to make a verse say something other than what it is saying — without being able to prove our assumption as self-evident — we are tacitly admitting that we simply do not like what is being said. It is merely a refusal to bend our own will to the will of God. Matthew 18:3-5 says,
3 and said, “Truly I say to you, unless you change and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 So whoever will humble himself like this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever receives one such child in My name, receives Me;
There is something about a child-like innocence which accepts the plain words of their parents — creating a vivid lesson for how we ought to see the words of our Lord and His disciples. We are to accept them with hearts as innocent as children and with the faith a child might have.
We are very privileged in these modern times to have the actual words of our Lord and His apostles. Thinking one can have a “truth” or special revelation which doesn’t need to agree with His commands — in spite of actually being able to read them — is tacit admission that one simply disagrees with them. Everything which we believe and do must line up, or we simply do not accept it as children.
Remember, Peter said that “His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him.” (2 Peter 1:3) He said not to be “unproductive in the true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (2 Peter 1:8) He said to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” (2 Peter 3:18) If anyone tells us we do not even need knowledge — let alone a true knowledge of our Lord — to bring about salvation, they are telling us a lie.
With that knowledge so readily available according to the teaching of the Lord Jesus and His apostles in the New Testament, we have no excuse — and we need to accept it.
The case study we have covered here is probably the most severe case of disagreeing with the Scripture. It is a disagreement with the words of the gospel of the Lord Jesus. It is a disagreement the likes of which could cost someone their very eternal life — because of how believing such a thing will change their behavior in this life. It is a shame — because He has the power to do all of the work in us. This is the milk of the word.
There are many peripheral matters in the Scripture which are not matters of salvation; however on the conclusions of this case study we say, “So far and no further.” The gospel — the word of righteousness by faith in Christ Jesus — the milk — must be accepted for true Spiritual unity among brethren. Paul says in Romans 16:17-19,
17 Now I urge you, brothers and sisters, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them. 18 For such people are slaves, not of our Lord Christ but of their own appetites; and by their smooth and flattering speech they deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting. 19 For the report of your obedience has reached everyone; therefore I am rejoicing over you, but I want you to be wise in what is good, and innocent in what is evil.
There can be no respect of persons or partiality when our brethren bring a teaching to us which is contrary to the teaching which we have learned from the Lord Jesus and His apostles. We also freely admit that even in such a case, it is no excuse to treat anyone with contempt. On the contrary, we should strive always “to make a defense to everyone who asks [us] to give an account for the hope that is in [us], but with gentleness and respect.” (1 Peter 3:15)
On matters not crucial to salvation, it is worth noting that as Hebrews 5:12-14 stated, if the milk of the word cannot even be accepted and understood, how could we even press on to maturity? Hebrews 5:11 states that those who cannot even understand the word of righteousness are “poor listeners.”
Therefore, let us strive not to be “poor listeners.” Let us be careful of ourselves — where we find ourselves disagreeing with plain words, let us be cautious. Proverbs 4:23 says,
Watch over your heart with all diligence, For from it flow the springs of life.
Proverbs 4:19 says,
Listen, my son, and be wise, And direct your heart in the way.
We are to listen — and we are to direct our hearts. Our hearts are not to direct us because they will lead us astray. Our evil desires are wickedly clever and adept at fooling us into thinking we are right, but in reality we have only become like the fool of Proverbs 18:2,
A fool does not delight in understanding, But in revealing his own mind.
We must take on the mind of the Spirit instead of revealing our own mind, which is foolishness. We state unequivocally that even our own minds are foolishness — we accept that designation — and count everything as loss in the face of the glory and divine help of the Lord Jesus, to whom belongs eminence, authority, judgement and righteousness for all eternity.
Let us therefore keep an exegesis which does not distort the Scripture to our own destruction. Amen.
Johan your last comment to me said that Jesus added to certain Laws. Again how is it possible if not one yod or tittle could pass from the Law if it was changed? You refuse to acknowledge that our bible says the Law was abolished in Ephesians 2:15.
So now I ask what does heaven and earth mean to you Matthew 5? After all if it is the end of the world then we can see that when we get to heaven there will be no marriage as we will be like angels. It therefore cannot mean what you suppose- no marriage no adultery Law. That means that the Ten commandments (adultery)are not valid as there is no matrimonial obligation. Therefore a yod and tittle will have changed even if you say they will pass away and yet somehow are changed.
So what does it mean heaven and earth may pass away?
How do you know something is untrue?
Can you not tell something is untrue by it’s contradiction?
That is logic. Not personal, emotional distortion.
The Bible should be understood how it was most likely written to be understood, rather than warping it to fit around something else, like the Freemasons warp it to fit their eclectic Gnosticism & Kabbalah. Even so, without a degree of scientific understanding and regard for observable, material fact, people will either become disillusioned or put their faith in the most ridiculous ideas.
Catholics say to ‘Heretics’ that they distort scripture, they are unfit to interpret, and it should be left to the more learned priesthood and Vatican.
Protestants however underline the importance of Matt 23:8, yet they have created endless fractured sects, where there should be no factions- so then what ought to unify “Christians”? Did sects unify the Israelites?
No, it was family units and tribe/ nation (philia) as well as moral principle, a hard thing to accept for a people who have become highly individualistic & almost rootless.
People also do not understand that individuals inside communities may suffer because of the actions or inactions of others in their own community, it’s all apart of consequence & free-will, there is no magical intervention to save an individual from the failures of their own people.
What individuals do in private will reflect what they do in public, their goals and vulnerabilities.
It is never down to the isolated issue of one physical action or indulgence, as we can all see with what is going on now, the slippery slope was real, despite people not being able to prove it in the past.
Thanks Johan, you have advanced my conviction Yods and Tittle’s were changed as we no longer have a Levitical priesthood. Thus the Law was changed. I am sure that you will not be able to digest for whatever reason. The New covenant that Jeremiah said is not like the Mosaic covenant is and has been here for thousands of years. I do not love the shadow of my wife but my wife. Deuteronomy 30 proves that the Law is the knowledge of good and evil. So I will not mix that with the Law of the Spirit of you do not mind. Many thanks loved the article and found it profound.
I can’t help but wonder if on some level we’re actually saying the same thing.
I’d like to make sure though, if you’d indulge me. Would you please clarify your position on verses like 1 John 3:3-7, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and Galatians 5:19-21?
Sure. EPH 2:15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace,
If the constitution in America was abolished it would be all. The means a definite all not part. So Jesus abolished the Law therefore no yod or tittle has legal title on your being.
Do you agree?
I don’t agree because ironically you are begging the question. Your interpretation of Ephesians 2:15 doesn’t prove that the entire law was abolished. It only assumes that the entire law was abolished. Your example of the constitution doesn’t help your case because the example itself is contrived towards your agenda and has nothing to do with the Bible.
Christ literally said, “Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets”, but you literally presume that He came to abolish the Law and the Prophets. Right until the end, even the Revelation (which isn’t yet completed) quotes the law and the prophets, so how can they be abolished?
Matthew 22,
37 And He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 Upon these two commandments hang the whole Law and the Prophets.
If the law is love, and the law always was love, and if according to you the law is abolished, then how is it that love still stands? Wasn’t love abolished? How can OT prophecy yet to the fulfilled in the Revalation be abolished if it hasn’t yet been fulfilled? Unless death itself is defeated and passes away, the OT Scriptures are not yet fulfilled. But they will be fulfilled as Christ said, “I have come to fulfil.” But if not yet fulfilled, then your view that the law and the prophets have passed away makes no sense.
John says “Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.” (1 John 3:4) Yet “No one who has been born of God practices sin” (v9) So no one born of God practiced lawlessness, because sin is lawlessness. Therefore, the law is still in effect. Christ confirms this when He says, “I never knew you; leave Me, you who practice lawlessness.” (Matt 7:23) Those who practice lawlessness are not allowed into the Kingdom, because lawlessness is sin.
But the law is love (Matt 22:40), and so whatever is not of love is sin. We are not to keep the ordinances of the law, which are “philosophy and empty deception in accordance with human tradition, in accordance with the elementary principles of the world, rather than in accordance with Christ.” (Col 2:8) The law does not “have the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and humility and severe treatment of the body.” Rather, we look for that which is “of value against fleshly indulgence.” (v23)
The ordinances of the law (especially circumcision in Ephesians 2) no longer stand against the nations, and so Christ brought Israel and the nations together. This is what Ephesians 2 is teaching, which is clear if you read the whole thing instead of cherry-picking one verse out of it and appending the US constitution to it.
Therefore I ask again: Would you please clarify your position on verses like 1 John 3:3-7, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and Galatians 5:19-21? I truly hope you will not blatantly ignore the question again in your next reply.
@CFT, I’ve been on the issue from a different perspective and here I found one of my scribbles, which cost me to get banned from LinkedIn thanks to the tolerant god chosen supremacist in America……“European civilization is owed to people who believed in Christ, not to the people who believed in Christianity.” – Remy Braque, The Red River Chronicle from Texas captured some of my moments, from my perspective Christ is the embodiment of conscience, ethics and knowing the difference between Right and Wrong, the very essence of the scriptures in the NT, that people overlook. https://muntslag1.rssing.com/chan-73103204/latest-article1.php
Lisette, it seems like the only place you don’t get banned is CFT. Ironic, huh? A “racist” white Christian website doesn’t censor you. By the way, that’s a great quote you posted, which is worth repeating here:
“The feminist movement in Western culture is engaged in the slow execution of Christ and Yahweh. Yet very few of the women and men now working for sexual equality within Christianity and Judaism realize the extent of their heresy.”
—Naomi Goldenberg, from her book “Changing of the Gods”
Socialism/Marxism is Judaism, and its ultimate purpose is to execute Christ finally and completely, so that there is no chance in anyone’s mind that a resurrection is possible.
“One of the finest things ever done by the mob was the Crucifixion of Christ. Intellectually it was a splendid gesture. But trust the mob to bungle the job. If I’d had charge of executing Christ, I’d have handled it differently. You see, what I’d have done was had him shipped to Rome and fed him to the lions. They could never have made a savior out of mincemeat!”
—Ben Hecht, Jewish writer
Lisette, I think you’re similar to John Wesley: instead of being chased and beaten by the mob for preaching in the open air, on today’s biggest soapbox you just get banned!
How many web sites have you been banned from?
I’m very impressed 🙂 God bless you!
That was a good read. I agree with it. I most certainly need to read more the plain word, rather than muddy my waters with conveluted “what-ifs”!
I have one query; I think I understand what is written, but I just wana make sure I comprehended: surely reading like a child, and educating oneself like a scholar must go hand in hand, otherwise we will take everything literally, like a child, or go round in circles analysing… ?
Example: Nations. This word we all know has caused everyone who has read like a child to include all kinds of creatures in all sorts of territory. Only thru analysis can the meaning of Nations be discovered and the truth be found. “Gentiles” being another example.
Example two: I am guilty of over analysing a lot of things in my quest for knowledge. I have sinned through my missinterpretation of the plain word. Too much mystical digging got me looking for serpents and Edomites under every rock… when they just wernt there in the first place.
Surely child-like reading and scholarship must mesh and balance themselves with one another?
In my experience, and from what I’ve witnessed, most missinterpretaions and wrong doctrine comes about from people who just don’t read the Bible and listen to some wolf in sheeps clothing priest/pastor/reverend/vicar/mystic/drongo… on the rare chance that I do meet an independent scholarly thinker who has read the Bible, they seldom come up with what churchianity preachs.
I think approaching the Scriptures “as a child” shouldn’t be taken literally, because, as you said, that would open you to all kinds of fanciful imaginings. Rather we are to attempt to wipe our slates clean, a tabula rasa, as best we can.
Most teachers and pastors make their followers think they need them to interpret the Bible for them, to ensure their future employment, and take advantage of people’s natural feelings that they need help with the “mysteries” of the Bible. So for most people, they allow this interpreter to stand between them and the Word of God, virtually ensuring that they will not learn the simplicity of Christ.
If we are not willing to do the work ourselves, we are guaranteed to take on someone else’s baggage — and not approach the Bible as an unbiased child. There are so many warnings about false teachers and prophets in the NT, yet few Christians believe those warnings apply to the teachers they have decided to entrust their salvation to. That’s a lot of trust — your eternal soul given over to these pastors who largely will mislead you.
Before approaching accepting anything they hear from their teachers and pastors, every Christian should take Paul’s advice to heart:
“Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” (1 Thessalonians 5:21)
That is a life-long endeavor, subjecting our beliefs to continuous scrutiny, sharpening it. Only with diligence, and taking complete responsibility for what we believe, can we ever hope approaching the true knowledge of Scripture.
Chesterton, that makes sense. If I approach the words of Christ with a clean slate, they are a lot more simple than what people make them out to be. The gospel is simple.
If we approach Christ who is our Teacher in the manner required by the gospel (with all we have, all our hearts, humble, acknowledging our sin, willing to learn, never justifying ourselves, knowing we must be righteous), He will teach us everything we need to know. It’s not in our own strength or intellect in which we will learn, but by His help and the Spirit. But it’s a lifelong process, like you said. It never ends.
It’s just that whatever we claim to have learned must line up with what Christ said in the Bible. I get the feeling sometimes people don’t like that part. I get the feeling sometimes people want others to believe them and it’s just inconvenient for them to have to prove it out of the Bible.
But Paul said “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.” (2 Tim 2:15) And also “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim 3:16-17) Lastly “For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.” (Rom 15:4)
When Paul went and debated with others in the synagogues in his ministry, they debated out of the Scripture. In a world where so many see angels, demons, visions, dreams, etc, we have the written word of Christ to keep us all on the same level. He said that He is our only teacher and we have the words of His teaching. It’s a blessing really.
I completely agree with this.
Where i think people error sometimes, which is similar to Chesterton’s point, is that people build up the theological constructs, a series of steps or beliefs, that one must have before they can reach Christ, and if youre not stepping up these steps, then youre not doing it right.
People are kind of programmed to work this way too. Thats why they hop from Church to Chruch, or from group to group, looking for the right theology before they feel like they can really know Christ. Because they think that the theology itself is Christ.
Personally, i believe that any man/woman, whether they are a part of a Catholic Chruch, Baptist Church, Orthodox Church, CI Church, or whether they are “universalist”, or DSCI or anything like that, if they bend the knee to Christ in their hearts and seek Him in their daily lives, then Christ will direct them in a way that is pleasing to Him. The way that they are directed or how that process to righteousness unfolds is completely between the man and Jesus.
If a man comes to you and they have incompatible doctrine to you, it should be debated through scripture, because the words written are”profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work”, but done out of a stance of ‘he is a believer in Christ, and is my brother whom i love, grace will be allotted to him and through that grace will proceed mercy.’ When i say “believer in Christ” i mean it as a believer who dwells in Christ and helps to comprise the Body. Remembering that Jesus never said that one has to believe in anything other than Him, and we identify our brothers based on their actions. The lovers of justice and doers of good.
I dunno John, did Jesus really say we only have to believe in Him? He said that if we love Him we should keep His commandments. In Matthew 7:21 there were people who believed in Him who were not welcome into the Kingdom. James said “You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!” Paul said “those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury” (Rom 2:8)
Paul also says “But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one.” (1 Cor 5:11) I don’t think it’s my place to decide who gets mercy and grace. That’s up to God.
Believing in Him means that you feed on all the words that come from His mouth as well. Its part of the belief.
What i was saying about theological constructs are beliefs that men have (whether partial right or wrong, partially or fully) which they then present like you have to do these things in order to reach God or please God. Some examples of this would be some believing that you have to baptized in water or else youre not saved, or you have to pay your tithes or else youre not saved, or you have to be a preterist or your not saved, or a partial preterist or your not saved, or you have believe in DSCI or else youre not saved etc. People call others heretics over these things and cause division and then force people to choose one of the constructs to follow instead of being lead right to the source, which is Christ himself. What Christ really wants is your heart, and then He can work from there.
Also regarding your quote from 1 Cor 5:11:
If we recall, the Church in Corinth was having some serious issues. In 1 Cor 1:11-12 the Church was quarreling over doctrines and teachers. And Paul responded to them in 1 Cor 1:13-17 their quarreling divides Christ, and that he came to preach the gospel which is seeking Jesus and Christ crucified and nothing more.
Paul confirmed this in 1 Cor 2:1-5 when he said:
“And so it was with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God.[a] 2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. 3 I came to you in weakness with great fear and trembling. 4 My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, 5 so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power.”
(the proclamation here about demonstration by the Spirit’s power (v4, v5) is why im hesitant to accept assertions about biblical mysteries without such demonstration).
Paul goes on to talk about how their increased knowledge lead to quarrels which proved they were still worldy. Which is basically what im trying to say. Stop trying to make the gospel about following after men. Its about Jesus and its all Christ.
Then in 1 Cor 5, we get into in a case against the Church which involved incest. We have already seen that Paul has established that they are infants in Christ with weak consciences.
Paul qualifies his next statement which you quoted (1 Cor 5:11) saying in 1 Cor 5:9-10:
“9 I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; 10 I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. ”
Meaning, you would probably have to die to never be around an immoral person or around immorality.
Then in your quote he says:
“11 But [f]actually, I wrote to you not to associate [g]with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church?”
He wanted them to remove those sinful people from their congregation so that those, whom were already established to have weak consciences, would not have their consciences defiled.
Now, why did Paul tell them to get these obviously sinful people out of the Church? Not only was it for the sake of the Church and their consciences, but it was also for the sake of the sinner as Paul points out in 1 Cor 5:5:
“5 I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord [e]Jesus.”
Paul was delivering the sinner whom was a believer in Christ (potentially) to be delivered up to Satan for the destruction of the flesh in order that he may be saved on the day of the Lord, just as it says in Isaiah 22:14:
“But the LORD of armies revealed Himself to me: “Certainly this wrongdoing will not be forgiven you Until you die,” says the Lord GOD of armies.”.
Physical death for your sin is a grace bestowed by God so that you can be forgiven. So, even these sinners who believe in Christ are under God’s grace.
However, those who are not God’s would likely not be given up to destruction of the flesh as to not pay the price for their sins and likely not receive forgiveness on the day of the Lord.
“Believing in Him means that you feed on all the words that come from His mouth as well. Its part of the belief… What Christ really wants is your heart, and then He can work from there.”
John, maybe I am a fool but I’m not sure what you mean. If anyone believes in Him and they are self-serving, or don’t keep His commandments, or obey unrighteousness… Do you believe that one can still be following Him?
Your views on 1 Cor… Again, I don’t understand. Are you suggesting that 1 Cor 5:10 is not to be applied to anyone except the Corinthians? Paul wrote in verse 13 “God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.””
As far as I can see, Paul is referring to passages in Deuteronomy, like with 17:7 where an idolater is to be put to death and it says “you shall purge the evil from your midst”.
Are you suggesting that Christians should be together regardless of the sin in their lives?
“Are you suggesting that Christians should be together regardless of the sin in their lives?”
No, im suggest the exact opposite. That Christians should not associate with others in their own congration whom are willfully sinning (implying they are unrepentant). And, if possible, pray that God delivers them up to Satan for destruction of the flesh so that they may be forgiven on the day of the Lord.
“Are you suggesting that 1 Cor 5:10 is not to be applied to anyone except the Corinthians?”
uuhhh, not really?. Im suggesting its applied to gentiles. The unbelieving heathen nations. In the immediate context, v10 would have meant all those who were not a part of the Church in Corinth. Again if we look at the section as a whole it reads:
“9 I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; 10 I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. 11 But [f]actually, I wrote to you not to associate [g]with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? 13 But those who are outside, God [h]judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.”
This is how im processing it. Feel free to agree or disagree, but it will at least shed light on the fact that im not saying at all that Christians should be around other willfully sinning Christians.
v9 He wrote them previously about associating with immoral people v10 He implies that they misunderstood his words, and said that he didnt mean this group of people (those outside the Church, the outsiders) v11 but instead meant these people; those inside the Church. v12 He basically says; who cares about the outsiders? we care about our brothers and sisters v13 He basically says; Let God handle them, instead, control what you can control which is your congregation.
“As far as I can see, Paul is referring to passages in Deuteronomy, like with 17:7 where an idolater is to be put to death and it says “you shall purge the evil from your midst”.”
Yes, i agree. He adds to that too, he states why he wants to purge the evil from the perspective of the sinner which is 1 Cor 5:5. It keeps the congregation clean and it delivers the sinner up for destruction of the flesh so that they may receive forgiveness in the day of the Lord.
“Are you suggesting that Christians should be together regardless of the sin in their lives?”
I dont understand where you got this from.
This all smacks of some kind of variation on judeo-Christianity….”believe in Jesus and you’re saved.” You basically say that no matter what doctrine they believe in, “if they bend the knee to Christ in their hearts and seek Him in their daily lives, then Christ will direct them in a way that is pleasing to Him.”
IF. Their ability to do all these things often has a lot to do with the doctrine they have been taught. Doctrine can have a huge effect on whether or not they are worshiping “another Jesus.” A lot of Christians believe that Jesus helps them win at sports and close real estate deals. If anything, most Christians who truly manage to believe in the right Jesus do so despite their doctrine or church, and that’s leaving a lot up to chance.
All this sounds like to me, in a round about way, you are trying to lower the bar and widen the gate for those eligible for salvation. Personally, the less you expect out of people, the less they will produce.
Oh, sorry Clock, i forgot to response to this too:
“If anyone believes in Him and they are self-serving, or don’t keep His commandments, or obey unrighteousness… Do you believe that one can still be following Him?”
No, this isnt what i believe. Personally, i believe that if youre sinning in your life, and you never receive a rebuke or correction from the Lord, then you were never one who believed in Him because you were never called, and you are not recorded in the Book of Life.
Following this, if you are called by the Lord, and you continue sinning, you will receive rebukes and corrections. And if you dont learn from them, it will result in your untimely death out of the Lord’s grace and election of you.
One personal example of this is my grandfather on my mother’s side. He is a white man. His surname implies that he may have been from a dispersed Israelite stock (if you believe the celts could have been Israelites). He was a “Christian” in the loosest sense possible. He went to church maybe a couple times during time i knew him. He was angry all the time, and treated no one well, and potentially was very sexually immoral.
The Lord struck him with severe arthritis in his legs and hips and back. He would whine in pain every single day of his life, all day long. He grew fat and even more bitter. The Lord ended up taking him when he was, i think, 55 years of age. He ended up dying of a heart attack with all of his major arteries fully clogged, he was alive for years because his heart grew smaller arteries off of his main ones which pumped blood inefficiently. His body would swell up like a balloon sometimes because of this.
In the rare moments where he would consign himself to doing good for the sake of the other person and not himself, the Lord would release the pain from him and he would able to walk around without a cane/walker and without pain.
He was the Lord’s to the very end because the Lord continuously rebuked him, and when did well, the Lord would have mercy. But, he was unfortunately, disobedient to the end and he lost his life untimely. He saw no prosperity in his days and lived in poverty with a wrecked house. But, due to the judgement given to him by the Lord during his days on this earth, i believe that he may receive forgiveness on the day of the Lord as it says in 1 Cor 5:5.
A bit long, super personal, but maybe can help you understand my perspective.
Edward I
Thanks for you input.
I do believe in the Lord’s grace and His mercy and His power, and His ability to achieve His desires.
I do believe that he punishes all disobedience and that we all reap what we sow.
John
You wrote — Physical death for your sin is a grace bestowed by God so that you can be forgiven. So, even these sinners who believe in Christ are under God’s grace.
I think I now understand more clearly why you and I “disagreed” with one another.
Let me ask you a simple question — will a person who believes in Jesus Christ who happens to be committing adultery — will such a person go to heaven if that person dies unrepentant?
In other words, how can you possibly justify what you just said above with 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and Galatians 5:20?
This is why I had to leave the “Brick and Mortars”. Because they were all very dishonest about this ONE question.
I’m curious how you answer. Thank you.
John, I’m sorry to hear about your grandfather. That sounds terrible. But if you say he was disobedient to the end but he was still saved, then to me your brand of “salvation” is one which cannot line up with mine. That is a division and obstacle contrary to what I have learned (Rom 16:17).
Galatians 5:
“19 Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21 envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. 24 And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.”
8 Consequently, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what was impossible for the law, in that it was weak through the flesh, God did. By[a] sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and concerning sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the requirement of the law would be fulfilled in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5
To be set free from the law that the requirement of the law (righteousness) is fulfilled in us. A law of sin and death: unfulfilled in the sinful flesh. In the Law of Christ (new Covenant) we are at liberty from the Law.
Having Grace from God.
This is an interesting verse to discuss. Romans 7 and 8 are some of my favorite chapters in the whole Bible.
Paul says “consequently”, but consequent from what? What is the point that he is making? The “law of sin and death” in Romans 8:2 is something which Paul defined in Romans 7. It is our inability to keep the law in the flesh:
“22 For I joyfully agree with the law of God in the inner person, 23 but I see a different law in the parts of my body waging war against the law of my mind, and making me a prisoner of the law of sin, the law which is in my body’s parts. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?” (Romans 7)
When we try to do it in our own strength, we will fail. “For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did”. The law is weak when kept in the flesh. The law itself cannot bring about the keeping of the law. The law itself brings only condemnation, not strength and righteousness.
“so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.” (Romans 8:4) The requirement of the law isn’t fulfilled in the flesh… The flesh cannot do it. “The requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us… who… walk… according to the Spirit.”
“5 For those who are in accord with the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are in accord with the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” (Romans 8)
“The mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God”. We must subject ourselves to the law of God, but the flesh cannot do it. Paul says “the Law is spiritual” (Romans 7:14), “but those who are in accord with the Spirit, [set their minds on] the things of the Spirit” (Romans 8:5). The law is not fleshly, it is spiritual. We need the mind of the Spirit to keep that which is Spiritual.
“But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.” (Romans 7:6)
“who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.” (2 Corinthians 3:6)
The flesh tries to serve according to the old covenant in the oldness of the letter. The Spirit makes us keep the new covenant in the newness of the Spirit, which gives life.
” 3 And everyone who has this hope set on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure. 4 Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness. 5 You know that He appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no sin. 6 No one who remains in Him sins continually; no one who sins continually has seen Him or knows Him. 7 Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous;” (1 John 3)
The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death.
Freedom from that Law or covenant of sin and death brings a new Law – the Law of the Spirit. So the New Covenant is a Law of the Spirit that fulfills all the requirements of the old.
No one under the Law of the Spirit is antinomian for the Spirit is the requirement of the Law. Now that we know their are two Laws we understand Jesus… Teach them to obey all that I have commanded them-Great Commission. Notice He never said teach them to obey all that Moses commanded them. Laws are commands to be fulfilled.. So which Law are we under as there are clearly two. There are no Levite priests in the New only the old. Yet God said you shall not add nor take away lest these curses come upon you. So make a separation and state clearly in your repentant heart that their are two laws and two covenants. Now, Hebrews does say where their is a change in the Law. So there is a change why do you insist we are under the old. So lets articulate this with scripture.
The Law is changed and a new one came in. Hebrews 7:11Now if perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on this basis the people received the law), why was there still need for another priest to appear—one in the order of Melchizedek and not in the order of Aaron? 12For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed as well.
The Preisthood and Law were changed. Yet some idiota still say that not one Yod or tittle has changed. Is this truth or am I just a man you attack, persecute and kill for fear of stated truth. We are not under the Law of sin and death rather under the Law of the Spirit of Grace and the Law has changed. Replaced for the hard of hearing and stiffnecks.
birnie wrote, “Yet some idiota still say that not one Yod or tittle has changed.”
Christ said, “18 For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter shall pass from the Law, until all is accomplished! 19 Therefore, whoever nullifies one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18)
That’s a tough statement to casually discard… but birnie, I’m not suggesting you start wearing tassels, if you get what I mean.
Although using your example of Hebrews 7:11, the interesting thing is that the requirement of the law is still fulfilled in Christ. He is still the High Priest. He still fulfills the requirement of a Sin Offering for us. When the law changed, it wasn’t removed. It was changed to something better. The whole discourse of Hebrews 7-9 is how the priesthood was changed for a better one, and how the tabernacle changed to the true tabernacle (Hebrews 8:2). The law serves as a “a copy and shadow of the heavenly things” (Hebrews 8:5).
For this reason, the law can never be nullified. If we nullify a “letter or stroke” then we must always be aware of what that “letter or stroke” was a shadow of. The “changing of the law” is a changing from the “letter/stroke/copy/shadow” to the “heavenly thing”.
Another example is the Sabbath. Resting on the seventh day is a shadow, because God did not actually rest from His labor (John 5:17). It points towards a heavenly thing… “Consequently, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God.” (Hebrews 4:9) To keep the Sabbath is to strive for eternal life. The shadow Sabbath is one day a week, the heavenly Sabbath requires of us seven days a week.
What about the food laws? The point of eating the right thing was to be “clean”. But Christ said food can’t make us clean. It is a pure heart which makes us clean (Mark 7:17-23). Paul says that these things cannot bring righteousness in and of themselves… they “are of no value against fleshly indulgence” (Colossians 2:23).
Birnie, we probably both know that abstaining from a certain food or not switching on the electric kettle on the Sabbath doesn’t bring about true righteousness. But to fulfill the Spirit is so much more than those things. It requires so much more of us.
The law is Spiritual… It points towards the heavenly behavior we must exhibit. The Mosaic law points in varying degrees toward the heavenly behavior. I say varying degrees, because we can’t really expand on murder, theft, adultery, etc. So yes, the Spirit (which points us to the “heavenly thing”) is the requirement of the law of God. But we must be found to be fulfilling the requirement of the law…
” 3 And everyone who has this hope set on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure. 4 Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness. 5 You know that He appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no sin. 6 No one who remains in Him sins continually; no one who sins continually has seen Him or knows Him. 7 Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous;” (1 John 3)
I think you miscomprehend a yod and tittle. It is all inclusive by the idea not a smallest stroke of the pen or part of a letter nor the smallest letter. What then of the words and sentences of the old covenant.
Scripture is clear. See; Deuteronomy 4:2
2You must not add to or subtract from what I command you, so that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I am giving you.
Now to take a Levite Priesthood and change it to a Melchizadech Priest is a change in words, letters and parts of the words iow a tittle and yod..
Melchizedek has a yod in the middle of the word and Levite has it at the end.
Therfore all must have been accomplished and fulfilled – to do so. Again I proclaim we were set free from the Law of sin and death unto the Law of the Spirit. Two Laws. Clearly the yod has passed/changed / and reemerged as in Melchizedek. Why because he was the priest who blessed Abraham not a Levitical one. So adding and subtracting has gone on so all must be fulfilled. Hello, we are new creatures in Christ. Heaven and earth has passed away. You were not allowed to change nor alter nor nullify as that meant all was fulfilled and it is just perfect. Jesus declared all food clean was he changing the Law before all was accomplished? God forbid. lease explain ho these words, yods and tittles even law and covenants changed without a full accomplishment.
Birnie, my position on Deuteronomy 4:2 is that it is also referring to something greater, as with the rest which I explained.
Deuteronomy 4:2 is a shadow, that we should keep the statutes and judgements of Christ and the apostles sent by Him. He Himself said “teach them all I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:20). The law itself gave provision for this in Deuteronomy 18:19, which it talks about in Hebrews 12:15: “See to it that you do not refuse Him who is speaking. For if those did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, much less will we escape who turn away from Him who warns us from heaven.”
Ironically, Deuteronomy 4:2 is binding on us and I affirm it.
The writer of Hebrews added to the Sabbath law in Hebrews 4. The writer of Hebrews said that the law is a shadow of heavenly things. The writer of Hebrews said that there is a true tabernacle. Christ added to the dietary laws in Mark 7. Christ added to the adultery, murder and vow laws in Matthew 5.
Christ said the lawless will not inherit the kingdom in Matthew 7:21. John said the sinners and lawless are not in Christ in 1 John 3. Paul says sinners won’t inherit the kingdom of God in 1 Corinthians 6 and Galatians 5.
Christ specifically said, “I came NOT TO ABOLISH, but to FULFILL”. Whatever our view of “fulfill” is, Christ made sure that we would know He didn’t mean it was going away when He said “NOT TO ABOLISH”. Then He went on to say heaven and earth would not pass away before the law passes away, just in case we didn’t understand when He said “NOT TO ABOLISH”.
Hebrews 12:25 says, “See to it that you do not refuse Him who is speaking.” Those verses are His words and the words He placed in others (Matthew 10:40). We should not refuse them.
Paul wrote — If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
Jesus Himself said — “He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and reveal Myself to him.”
Lastly, Paul wrote — “…In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power..”
Antinomians beware.
I’ve heard that the modern term for this phenomenon is “headcanoning”.
I met up with some Boomer brethren this past weekend and they told me that they were watching some hyped Churchianity (((production))) called “The Chosen”, set during the time of Christ.
Point being, this show has, like the movie “Risen”, cast most every non-Roman as some dusky dunecoon, leading viewers to “headcanon” that the Judeans in Jesus’ day looked like the Arabs/Jews over there today.
The rule of thumb is that “if you know a Jew, you hate the Jews” and if Whites headcanon that Christianity is the religion of the same dunecoons and sand goblins who gyp them in everyday life then I fear they will walk out of the faith.
I’ve seen resources mentioned on here to prove that these Judeans were White, and some I have saved, but is there a compendium of them to use as a most solid reference?
There was no significant arab population in the Levant until the Muslims conquered Jerusalem in 637 AD. The Persians had sacked Jerusalem in 613 AD, but Byzantine Emperor Heraclius pushed them out and returned Jerusalem to Byzantine control. For hundreds of years prior to that, Judea had largely still been occupied by Romans of the east, Christian Byzantines, who called the area Palestina Prima. The Byzantines were White, and it would be foolish to argue otherwise. Here’s a good description of what happened:
“Jerusalem was besieged shortly in 637 CE and then capitulated after receiving guarantees of safety personally from Caliph Umar. The holy city thus entered Muslim control bloodlessly and the Jewish population that had been banished by the Romans, five centuries prior, was allowed to return. Umar also dismissed Khalid from his post officially; this was either because of personal reasons or because of controversies around the general.”
https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1571/early-muslim-conquests-622-656-ce/
Notice that when the Muslims conquered Jerusalem, the Jews were allowed to return — most likely because for the last 500 years the banished Jews had lived in cities like Damascus, and among the outlying Arabs, which is where they acquired that “arab” look to many of them. The Jews of Persia had aided the Persian invasion of Jerusalem in 613 AD in hopes they could reoccupy the city, but they would have to wait until the Muslim conquest in 637 AD before that happened.
Sources for this article are:
Ali, S. A. Short History of the Saracens. Apex Books Concern, 1981.
Doak, R. S. Empire of the Islamic World. Chelsea House Publications, 2009.
Donner, F. M. The Early Islamic Conquests. ACLS Humanities E-Book, 2008.
Nicolle, D. Yarmuk AD 636. Osprey Publishing, 1994.
Saunders, J. J. A History of Medieval Islam. Routledge, 1978.
Sonn, T. Islam. Wiley-Blackwell, 2015.
I’ve been raised on vintage gospel songs and they so oft encourage us to hasten the day, in accordance with 2 Peter 3:12, but how do we square this with Amos 5:18, which warns us not to hasten the day?
Similarly, vintage gospel makes much of 1 Thessalonians 4:17’s “Meeting in the Air”, which seems like it suggests a post-trib rapture.
Recently on here though, Matthew 24 was mentioned and Matthew 24:36-42 implies a rapture. Rereading it, it gives me the impression that it will happen suddenly while people are going about their everyday life, like the the great flood it is compared to (38-39) did.
So now I’m a bit confused, how can I sort out Jesus seemingly implying that there will be a pre-trib rapture with Paul seeming to outright state that there will be a post-trib rapture?
I don’t think Amos 5:18 is saying not to hasten the day… there are those who would hasten the day who would have a bad time on the day, even though they hastened it (Matthew 7:21 and all that). Doesn’t exclude Peter’s words. I guess the Amos 5:18 people thought they didn’t need to be righteous to hasten the day.
There’s probably some significance in Revelation 16:15 (which is arguably late in events) saying that He will come like a thief. I guess the world is going to go through the events of Revelation without even knowing it…
We are 😉
This article hits the nail on the head with the detriment of believing that we can interpret the bible from our own will. Id also argue this should include believing that any one of us can interpret the entirety of scripture as is. At some point, not all mysteries have been revealed to us yet, and if we go on to unravel them, we are likely doing the construction ourselves.
We have many examples of the follies committed by the Pharisees, and honestly, from a scriptural perspective, they were easy mistakes to make:
Matthew 19:3, 7 – The Pharisees misunderstood Deuteronomy 24:1. They never looked deeper into the Law and never felt the Lord’s heart. The Lord’s response in Matthew 19:4-6, 8-9 basically equated to, you dont understand My will and you dont perceive My mercies. And because of this, you have turned my mercy into a weapon which permeated sin.
Similarly:
In Matthew 12:2,10 – The Pharisees misunderstood the Sabbath because of the severity of punishment doled in Number 15:32-36. The Pharisees clearly gave the benefit of the doubt to the man gathering sticks, probably believing his intentions of his heart to be innocent, and they clearly viewed God as a tyrant who strikes down anyone whom disobeys the Sabbath. Jesus’s response in Matthew 12:3-9, 11-13 showed that it was instead the Lord who shows mercy to those with the right heart, desiring compassion. And that the Sabbath wasnt a day to cease from doing good, but rather a day to cease from burdens and to rest from them. Doing good is not a burden.
The Lord is righteous and rich in compassion! Gentle beyond our capability to measure!
What’s most important is we learn the heart of Jesus. Knowing the words within the Bible isnt enough:
Proverbs 3:5-6 “5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart (faith). And do not lean on your own understanding. 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him (worship), And He will make your paths straight. 7 Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the Lord and turn away from evil.”
John 5:39 “” You examine the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is those very Scriptures that testify about Me;””
If we rely on our own understanding and push out our judgement from that understanding, then we will just expose ourselves like the Pharisees did:
John 8:3-9 “3 The scribes and the Pharisees *brought a woman caught in adultery, and having set her in the center of the court, 4 they *said to Him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women; what then do You say?” 6 They were saying this, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground. 7 But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. 9 When they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, and He was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the center of the court. ”
Ultimately, Jesus Christ, who is alive, is the only way:
““Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through Me.””
This is a quality article. I wish that more like this would be produced. Using the Bible to point people towards a relationship with Christ Himself instead of writing articles that build a theological framework by which they believe people must fit into in order to attain to righteousness. Jesus Christ isnt a theology, He is alive. Which is why id venture to take a step further that our main thrust, and the only thing that matters for living a righteous life is to seek the Lord personally. No amount of Bible of reading, even if through logical, philosophical, and/or scientific practices, will ever get us to where we should be unless we seek and acknowledge the Lord in our hearts first.
Id argue that a man whom doesnt even own a Bible, but kneels to the Lord in his heart, constantly, will lead a more righteous life than a man who knows all the original languages, has copies of all the manuscripts, and has the whole bible memorized but relies on his knowledge for salvation. Why? because the Lord will make the man stand whom bows to Him, but He will cause the other man to fall from his heights. Even the righteous, if they turn their righteousness into pride, they will fall as well, just ask Job.
While I agree with a lot of what you are saying, there is a good bit I do not – mainly, a very eloquent way of saying “no one has all the answers” and therefor there is no definitive truth, so if anyone claims there is, they are trying to rule over your ‘faith’ by telling you that you are wrong.
Everything you do, everything you think, must meet the muster of the Scriptures. Christ and the apostles declare there is one truth, therefor only one method of salvation, and for a very specific group of people. Why would you want to dance around that?
I would disagree that Christ is not a theology – of course He is! Just because all other religions make ‘theology’ look bad, Christ and His commandments are the PUREST of theology. We have specific instructions. The problem is, our own PRECONCEIVED NOTIONS ruin those instructions, thus causing dissension and debate. However, if we are truly being led by the spirit, debate is what brings us closer and closer to the truth, in combination with Scriptural study, of course.
I declare that we may not ever be able to know everything about the Bible – as we were never intended to – but we are certainly designed to know it to the level we know Christ and have every license to REASON with it – and I mean to use it to reason with. The Bible is the Word, and the Word is Christ, so we need to read it and study it. That should be a natural result of a Christian in the true faith, just as a righteous life is.
Not everyone who studies the Scriptures and tries to teach truths that were hidden to us due to our preconceptions is a pharisee…but we better have our own ducks in a row if we are willing to condemn them as such, not approaching Christ in the deepest of humility and meekness, having disposed of all preconceptions prior to the lesson. If the teaching meets the muster of Scripture, it is truth. If it doesn’t satisfy your heart – not a qualifying answer. It is then easy to determine a cult of personality as opposed to a man chosen by Christ to teach the truth.
And finally – if we can’t trust any of us to know the real truth about anything in the Scriptures, why all the talk about the truth? And why would the dialog between Aquilla and Priscilla, and Apollos be logged in Scripture, if not to prove that there IS a proper truth concerning our salvation?
I understand what you’re saying. As I’m aware of the difficulty of what I was trying to say, it shouldn’t be difficult, but it is.
Christ isn’t a theology. Theology is the study of who or what God is. Christ is not the study per se, not the theology, he is the subject of the study which people don’t understand.
Imagine that someone wrote a biography about Ottify and then released it to the world. And then people picked up that bibliography and they read it. Inevitability, while it talked about you and had some of your deeds and struggles in it, it wouldn’t be all you. And because the people who are reading your bibliography and are coming from the perspective or not knowing you, they likely will make wrong assumptions about you. Imagine that most people make wrong assumptions about you. What would you do? You would say to those people “hey guys, I’m still alive. I’m over here. If you have questions, you can ask me and I’ll tell you.” Because your are, yourself, bigger than the bibliography. The bibliography talks about you, but it’s not fully you. You’re not limited to bibliography.
That’s what I’m saying. Jesus is saying, “hey guys, I’m still alive, come and seek Me so that I may tell you”.
My comments relative to mysteries; how is it unfair to say that tackling unrevealed mysteries may be in danger of our own construction? Unless the Holy Spirit is witnessing to the revelation, how can we trust it as absolute truth? It’s cool to talk about and edifying to think about and look at and ponder these things as to keep us in awe of our God, but to go beyond that is, in my opinion, shaky ground. Again, my opinion.
When you things like ” meet the muster of Scripture” what do you mean? The masoretic text? Which version? The NASB, the NRSV, the KJV, the NIV, the NKJV, the NASB 1995, the KJV 1611? Is it the Geneva Bible perhaps? Or is it the Septuigant? But which version? We have the codices of Alexandrinus, Sinaiticus, and Vaticanus. The Septuigant also recognizes more books as canonical which could change conclusions or bring to doubt certain views on things. Or is the Word perfectly preserved in one of the DSS caves which we just haven’t managed to uncover yet?
The point is the Word is Jesus Christ, alive. The Bible tells about Jesus. The Bible says go to Jesus. One can look at the Bible and never find Jesus.
That’s what I’m saying. It’s in lock step with the article in stating that it’s easy for people to read the Bible and mess it all up.
When people believe that the Bible is the only place to go and the only Word we have, then 2 things thay happen. 1) people seek out experts on the Bible and they follow them. Or 2) they themselves try to become experts on the Bible and gain followers themselves. It creates a culture of men following men. Certainly, some men can lead faithfully, but it creates an unsustainable structure. Just ask any Christian denomination. It eventually leads to pharisaism within that structure at some point. But, Jesus says you can access Me directly, without another man in the way.
Yes, some men are chosen by God to pastor this flock and that flock. And I certainly wouldn’t want to deny any of them. But, if you look at what the NT apostles taught, predominantly, was how to live a Christian life, seeking after Christ for yourself. Which is what I’m trying to say here.
“And finally – if we can’t trust any of us to know the real truth about anything in the Scriptures, why all the talk about the truth?”
The real Truth is knowing Jesus Christ personally. It’s simple. Thats the simplicity. Saying things like this means that you don’t understand what I’m trying to say. Maybe because you think I’m incapable of speaking any truth myself?
“And why would the dialog between Aquilla and Priscilla and Apollos”
Perfect example. Apollos already had the all the Scriptural knowledge (he was mighty in the scripture). He knew the words in the Bible already, further than that, he already knew of the important of repentance (the baptism if John) and believed Jesus to be the Christ. But, he needed some direction in the true way of Christ (who gave him that direction but righteous tent makers). One he got it, he was all the more efficient with his knowledge.
Regarding Aquila and Priscilla and Apollos. Really what I’m looking to do/be is that little tent maker who has something to offer amidst those mighty in Scripture. A fellow worker doing their part.
This is exactly what I have been saying: the Holocaust is a FACT. How do we know it is a fact? Because the rabbis say so. And why do the rabbis say so? Because it is a fact.